On Mon, 26 Mar 2001 13:39:17 +0200 (CEST), Bernie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> computers that aren't a decade old. However you live in a country where
> this shouldn't be a problem. I'm not saying that they are not worth using,
> it's just that newer (or in most peoples eye old) computers are faster and
> thereby are more "fun" (you don't need to sit around and wait for advanced
> things to happen).
Well, my 386 was only *five* years old when I got it. Brand new it cost
over $1700, and I paid $150 for it with a fairly decent SVGA monitor.
It wasn't a bad deal in 1995. I agree it's not much today, but it still
works just fine for email with Arachne. And it certainly makes a good
terminal for shell accounts. And it is exactly the minimum system
reccommeded for Arachne.
> My opinion will however not change, people running on 386/486 machines
> should try and upgrade them, in most of the "western world" this is easy
> and cheap to do. And since there are so many I still think it's bad that
> someone needs to sit with a 386.
If you changed the "should" to "might want to consider" I wouldn't
have an argument with you at all.
But if a system is adequate for it's use then it's a waste of
effort to upgrade. Mostly I just do lots of email and until recently
always had a more pressing need--like buying up-to-date systems
for my three kids in college.
Besides there is a certain reverse chic using DOS and this obsolete
computer. It amuses me.
There is a new system in my future, no doubt, so you can stop feeling
bad on my behalf.
Sam Ewalt
Croswell, Michigan, USA
-- Arachne V1.70;rev.3, NON-COMMERCIAL copy, http://arachne.cz/
